About your Search

20120930
20121008
STATION
CNN 2
CNNW 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 2
CNBC 1
KQEH (PBS) 1
WETA 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 18
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)
. but some nay sayers wonder if it is too good to be true. jack welch, former ceo, tweets unbelievable jobs numbers, the chicago guys will do anything, can't debate, so change numbers. and one group suggested maybe somebody played with the numbers. >> very good timing for the president. if he mapped it out to be able to have it, this is one you would want to have. he placed the unemployment as the longest time in history knew. >> but the labor department scoffed at the notion that anybody manipulated the jobs report. >> it is collected by the interviewers who are all career federal employees. so you would have to imagine that the people who participate in the survey, and they do this voluntarily, are for some reason trying to manipulate things. >> and it is not unusual for the surveys, one based on asking the companies, the other based on asking individuals, to have a wide difference, why? the household survey shows all sorts of workers, including self-employed and certain agriculture workers. and it is based on a much smaller sample than the other businesses. keith hall says that the numbe
on twitter from former head of ge, jack welch. >> welch is one of america's most rebe inspected former ceo's. so when he tweets, people tend to listen. within minutes of the jobs report he tweeted quote, unbelievable jobs numbers. this chicago guys will do anything, can't debate so change numbers and facing a torrent of criticism for that. welch stopped by his tweet and those numbers. >> this whole number is made up of a whole mess of an assumptions who is participating and who is not working and who is trying to work, but dropped out. all of these things, it just raises the question, oh, i think there ought to be a good discussion about how this number is calculated. >> and most analysts aren't dismissing his crimsism as utterly without evidence and at the same time pointing out that the jobs numbers reflect an obama policy that has the economy stuck in neutral. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies that this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is actually, you ask small employers, it's causing them not to hire becau
. you are jack welch. jack, you've got to take this opportunity while everybody is listening to you to actually say, yes, anderson, i'm taking that tweet back. i'm going to send a new tweet to say i was exaggerating. there are problems bls should look into but to throw out an accusation that's like asking the government how often do you beat your wife. >> i should have had a question mark at the back of it, ali, let's face it, but the facts, are ali, no matter how you want to look at this, we had 25 economists polled before this number came out. the average number they expected was about 115,000. not one of them -- >> yes. >> had a number below 1.1. >> labor secretary hilda so li s shot back at the critics telling cnn it was insulting for people to suggest her department was manipulating numbers for the president's benefit. >>> the obama and romney campaigns are ratcheting up the rhetoric in the wake of the jobs report. our political editor paul steinhauser hats candidate's comments. one set of numbers, two sets of eyes. >> yeah, very, very different responses to the friday jobs rep
. doug we talked about a tweet from jack welch. did that ignite the controversy? >>reporter: the recovery surrounding friday's release of the unemployment numbers continues to swirl after jack welch, the respected former c.e.o. of g.e. treated "unbelievable jobs numbers. the chicago guys will do anything. can't debate? change numbers." facing criticism if the tweet he stuck by the criticism of the numbers. >> this number is made up of a whole mess of assumptions: who is participating, who is not working, who is trying for work, who has dropped out. it just begs the question. i think there ought to be a good discussion how this number is calculated. >>reporter: most analysts and the obama campaign are dismanage the criticisms as "without evidence." >> we wonder why institutions in this country are, the perception of institutions are failing, because people go on tv and make sufficient h stuff -- make stuff up. >> they had full charge of the first two years and the policies this president put into place actually made it worse, including the fact that obamacare is tale, if you ask employers,
questioned the accuracy of the data. on twitter, former general electric c.e.o. jack welch suggested the obama administration manipulated the numbers. but on cnbc, labor secretary hilda solis called that claim "ludicrous" and defended the bureau of labor statistics. >> you know, i'm insulted when i hear that,ecause we have a very professional civil service organization where you have top, top economists that work at the b.l.s. >> brown: the employment numbers landed as the campaigns put up new ads attacking each other on jobs and taxes. >> president obama says he's creating jobs. but he's really creating debt. the facts are clear. obama's four deficits are the four largest in u.s. history. he's adding almost as much debt as all 43 previous presidents combined. and over 30 cents of every dollar obama spends is borrowed, much of it from countries like china. he's not just wasting money; he's borrowing it and then wasting it. we can't afford four more years. >> why won't romney level with us about his tax plan, which gives the wealthy huge new tax breaks? because, according to experts,
the guest host, squawk market taylor, jack welch tweeted that maybe this number's been played with. >> those chicago guys will do anything. >> by the way, don't miss "squawk box" on monday and we'll be talking with carly fiorina former chairman and ceo of hp. >>> final thoughts from our guest host john taylor of fs concepts. we were just talking about this tweet from jack welch. he tweeted, unbelievable numbers. the chicago guys will do everything. can't debate the numbers. it is lighting up the tweet sphere. >> there was a huge 873,000 increase in the household survey exceeding the 418 in the labor force. a lot of these numbers, is there wiggle room? there's assumptions, right? >> there's a lot of wiggle room. they're calling up people on the phone. who knows who answers the phone? nowadays you have cell phones and you're not going to answer the phone at home. my phone won't be answered because you'll say that's some weird person polling me. >> although some would say how come it goes and not above. that is volatile. >> because of that, don't trust the number like that. steve had the right
his anniversary on the night of the debate. >> peter: and interesting 7.8% number, economists and jack welch, where did this come from, the raw numbers put out and a disconnect. >> clayton: we have to look the at revised numbers a few months later and maybe find out in december what the true number was or were in september. but we have new numbers out of ohio. the all important battle ground state of ohio where president obama has been leading significantly there. in recent polls, well not significantly, but 5 or 4 points accord to go what karl rove was talking about, 49-50%. and looking at virginia, and there mitt romney has pulled ahead of president obama 49-48% within the mar begin of error, but definitely experiencing a debate bounce. and speaking of which, let's talk about the money they have been able to raise because this plays into how people are feeling after the debate as well. in just the 48 hours since the debate, mitt romney has been able to raise 12 million dollars online and just staggering numbers. >> peter: at the same time, the president announced that they raised 181
Search Results 0 to 17 of about 18 (some duplicates have been removed)